Will technical illustrations of this quality ever be produced again? I'm doubtful. More reason to celebrate the genius of the last practitioners of the art.

The economics are daunting. You will note in the article that this cutaway was originally solicited by Phillip Morris. David Kimble'd cutaways are backed by General Motors. That's pretty much what it takes. A magazine can't swing it.

Some folks here will remember when car magazines would even run paintings on their covers now and then -- really nice stuff, too. It was never a winner from a newsstand sales point of view but editors felt like they needed to do it for their brand and image. It was classy. No class now, only survival.

While I was able to make a living from the major sponsors, it allowed me to do the less commercial work at much reduced charges - otherwise very few of the historic cars that I illustrated later in my career would have been done. However, the big problem is the lack of interest, if the general public had the enthusiasm and perseverance to study a complex cutaway, the sort that appeared weekly in the 'Eagle' comic, the money would suddenly reappear. It is dead in the water, not just technical illustration, but most, if not all, traditional illustrating.

With recent generations brought up with TV and video games, computer-generated, moving images, and attention-deficit disorder apparently spreading its tentacles through society, it's not surprising that no-one is beating a path to my door. I'm a pragmatist, I have few regrets, I wish I had done more, but there you go...

Well Tony as far as I can tell you had the distinct honor of setting the high water mark as far as the quality of cutaway illustrations of cars. I'm sure you had your own favorites and influences but quite frankly I've never seen work the equal of yours and if it had been done I most likely would have.

Perhaps only cultures that prioritize building mechanical things can appreciate this type of art and we in the West have to a significant degree lost that. Cutaway illustrations built dreams of mechanical engineering in my head when I was young; children in the West probably don't dream of building fantastic mechanical things any longer.

When a great artist like our Tony Matthews finds orders drying up-- and I know this sounds schmaltzy and like hyperbole-- I think that is indicative of a society that is in a very important sense dying. Maybe there is a budding crop of genius technical illustrators in China now. I hope there are.

I'm absolutely ignorrant of the subject so forgive me Tony. When you are producing these drawings, are you drawing them off of many many photos that you take or are you sitting down and drawing as the car sits in front of you (ala old protrait style)???

While I was able to make a living from the major sponsors, it allowed me to do the less commercial work at much reduced charges - otherwise very few of the historic cars that I illustrated later in my career would have been done. However, the big problem is the lack of interest, if the general public had the enthusiasm and perseverance to study a complex cutaway, the sort that appeared weekly in the 'Eagle' comic, the money would suddenly reappear. It is dead in the water, not just technical illustration, but most, if not all, traditional illustrating.

With recent generations brought up with TV and video games, computer-generated, moving images, and attention-deficit disorder apparently spreading its tentacles through society, it's not surprising that no-one is beating a path to my door. I'm a pragmatist, I have few regrets, I wish I had done more, but there you go...

From what I hear, GM is losing interest too.

Tony Matthews-

I have a book of piston aircraft engine cutaways I got from Rolls-Royce when I worked for the turbine engine company about 15 or 20 years ago. They were done by a guy named Lyndon Jones I believe. I'm sure you've heard of him. His illustrations are not quite as detailed as yours, but to an engineer like me that started out making drawings with ink-on-mylar, both his and your cutaway drawings are true works of art. Sadly, modern 3D CAD systems give even artistically-challenged hacks like me the ability to produce realistic complex cross-section rendered images.

In fact, many people fail to realize that the pictures of automobiles now used in magazine advertisements are digitally rendered images, and not actual photographs of the car. With a digital rendering, you don't even need a car, or photographer, or studio. A perfect digital image of the car can be produced in any setting, in any paint color, and with any choice of options. It is now literally impossible to tell the difference between many digitally rendered images and photographs.

I'm absolutely ignorrant of the subject so forgive me Tony. When you are producing these drawings, are you drawing them off of many many photos that you take or are you sitting down and drawing as the car sits in front of you (ala old protrait style)???

Well, a) I'm not comfortable sitting and sketching, and the basic drawing does involve the use of instruments. Some areas are freehand, but straightedges, French curves and ellipse guides are all used - ellipse guides especially, they transformed traditional technical illustrating. As for b), most times cars were either being worked on, were incomplete, and/or were wrapped and crated immediately the last bodypanel was attached. I used to take two or three rolls of 35mm B&W film, some colour shots and an occasional sketch. If I could get it (and I strove to get it) man overall shot from the angle that I wanted, or was asked to use, was a boon, as sketching a car from scratch involves another full day before the cutting-away starts. Time is of the essence!

Smaller items were usually done from the actual object, and I would have bits posted or courierd to me if I could not collect. Unfortunately, most had to be returned. Some illustrations were done soley from engineering drawings, and all the engines and gearboxes were done using varying quantities of works drawings, mixed with photographs of whatever bits were actually made and available.

Sadly, you're the last of a dying breed.

Regards,slider

On reading this I immediately thought of the one remaining male Taihitian parakeet, doomed to a solitary and absolute end. However, I'm not the last, and technical illustration continues, even if it is generated from the files in the computer system that designed the item. The World moves on...

The best product produced by computer assisted means isn't even in the same category as Tony's illustrations. Like comparing a perfect vintage Bugatti to a clapped out Hyundai.

Not surprisingly, perhaps, owing to his exceptional eye, Tony is also a wonderful photographer. I've seen some photos of his children he did that are really remarkable, extraordinary, as fine as you will see anywhere. If he hadn't pursued illustration he could have easily gone that way.

A bit on the side, as much as I appreciate Tony's work, I can't help thinking that this was the car, with the 500i engine, that killed CART. Much to MrE's delight of course, when the series was becoming a serious threat, why Tony George was suckered into helping out.

Rasputin- I always thought CART racing during the 80's and early 90's was fantastic. Cars with a good mix of technology and cost control, and drivers that had personality. Guys like Emmo, Nigel, Lil' Al, Andretti, Mears, Rahal, Vasser.

I don't think that the 500i engine had anything to do with the downfall of CART. The 500i engine was only legal for the Indy 500 race, which was a USAC sanctioned event. Another thing to consider is that in all likelihood no one besides Roger Penske would have been able to get that engine past scrutineering.

Thanks for all of the links Magoo. Seeing hand drawn pictures of these cars is stunning. Sometimes I find them to be more intriguing to look at than any real life pictures.

I have described the Tony Matthews cutaways as the next best thing to being able to disassemble and reassemble a car with your own hands. When you consider how much information is conveyed, and in one highly attractive painting....

Not really, but the mindless spending on a one-race engine reinforced the old image of CART as "Chevy And Rich Teams", which paved the way for the low-budget IRL.

The 500I (or 265E as it still is to some of us) is often sited as the cause of the CART / IRL split. I'm not sure how real that is or is not but certainly the E was not conceived as a 1 race engine. It's certainly true to say that it's advantage was seen as a one shot deal but after May 1994 Ilmor produced a new run of castings after the boost was reduced with a view to supplying other teams with the engine. The boost was then reduced a second time rendering it uncompetitive along with other pushrod engines (the E was not the only engine of it's type).

I'm probably slightly prejudiced as I worked on CART in the late 1990's/ early 2000's but it was a great series beyond the 1980's and early 1990's (they were great too). There was a great atmosphere at the time and watching the likes of Dario Franchitti, Greg Moore, Montoya etc. was just breathtaking. I loved the races where ether Michael Andretti or Paul Tracy ended up at the back of the pack because you just knew there would be fireworks.

And the cars were gorgeous to look at - they even had sensible sized wheels - why F1 is still on 13 inch rims is totally beyond me. Remembering the sound of a turbo V8 on a short oval still haunts me - it reverberates and lives in a way that makes the hairs on the back of your neck stand up. It was a great formula - lowish downforce, lots of power, V8's, turbos etc.

A last word for the poor old 265D engine - the E get all the headlines but the D won pretty much everything else that year....

Realistically, the Ilmor A and especially the engine distribution system that arose with it did more to create the split than the pushrod engine.

And it's not like the events that resulted were anyone's intention or fault. It's just people doing the best they can to survive in racing, doing what they honestly believe is best for their interests and for the sport. At times, both side were incredibly blind to the needs and perspectives of the other, but that's how it goes in human affairs.

Unlike many, I see an air of inevitability about the split. I don't think it could have been avoided if only for someone's action or lack of action. It was a great type of racing and a great time in racing and it's not realistic to just presume that it was naturally destined to last forever.

Patrick, I hope someone more knowledgeable will correct me if I'm wrong, but my uneducated guess is that F1 is sticking to 13" rims as a convenient way of keeping the brakes in check... In those wheels, I guess there's not much room for teams to fool around in.

Surely the brakes are restricted in other ways, too. Disc thickness, caliper materials and method of manufacture. I'm so used to seeing 13" wheels on F1 cars that it's not something I think about - it doesn't alter the fact that most of the cars built for the CART series during the time in question were great-looking vehicles, some even being, in my view, elegant. That is not a word I would use to describe any F1 car from the last couple of decades.

Patrick, I hope someone more knowledgeable will correct me if I'm wrong, but my uneducated guess is that F1 is sticking to 13" rims as a convenient way of keeping the brakes in check... In those wheels, I guess there's not much room for teams to fool around in.

I'm really not sure why they have stuck to 13 inch rims - I've always assumed it's for commercial reasons i.e. keep them the same rather then go through the expense of changing. Aside from them looking slightly balloon like which I guess we all overlook as we are so used to them they kind of take the fun out of the suspension system for me. A huge proportion of the suspension travel is in the tire which for the car designer makes getting the mechanical bits correct not terribly important as the control is large governed by the tire company. Largely all you can do is make your car get the tire to behave in the way you want. If there is variations in the tire performance between sets, which there seems to be at present it really seems to show.

The cars from about 2005 onwards really sacrifice most of the mechanical advantage of the suspension layout for aero (zero keel and this year Ferrari's pull rod front suspension) which tell you it's just not that significant (although every tenth counts so it's important to do the best you can with it). I've always been of the view that a lower profile tire would put more emphasis back on to the mechanical side and give the engineers more tools to work with again. I'll be the first to admit to being very prejudice here as I'm a mechanical guy at heart. On a purely athletic level the lower profile tire on the Indycars do seem to look better.

Brake wise you could just restrict the size of the disc. A bigger wheel also makes the tire less sensitive to heat transfer from the brakes which would probably not be a bad thing as it seems to be a huge problem for certain cars at the moment.

Realistically, the Ilmor A and especially the engine distribution system that arose with it did more to create the split than the pushrod engine.

And it's not like the events that resulted were anyone's intention or fault. It's just people doing the best they can to survive in racing, doing what they honestly believe is best for their interests and for the sport. At times, both side were incredibly blind to the needs and perspectives of the other, but that's how it goes in human affairs.

Unlike many, I see an air of inevitability about the split. I don't think it could have been avoided if only for someone's action or lack of action. It was a great type of racing and a great time in racing and it's not realistic to just presume that it was naturally destined to last forever.

I've heard this argument before and I'm not sure whether I buy into it or not. I might be totally wrong here so please feel free to correct me but the way I've always seen it (from an admittedly partisan stand point) is the IRL when launched was originally billed as an affordable completive series with an emphasis on having a more American basis to it. Back in the days of the 265A there was no shortage of teams as such and Ford was certainly still a factor becoming more so in 1992 onwards when the XB arrived. There was also Porsche, Alfa and Buick out there but the major players were American branded engines.

The leasing system was a response to a team sending engines to another manufacture to look at - there was nothing to stop that team doing so as far as I'm aware, they owned the engines. I'm not sure how this really could have kicked off the split in so far as the cost of a lease deal was possibly higher then the cost of an engine - having said that the HB appeared and Chevy had to respond which obviously incurs development cost. In fairness a cheep lease agreement was available on the 265A when the 265C was introduced as a way of keeping some of the smaller teams going.

So at that time (say 1993) you had three American branded engines (Chevy, Ford and Buick) with plenty of american drivers driving cars mostly if not all made in the UK. In 1994 that changed a bit as Chevy decided they had done about everything the could and Ilmor operated in 1994 under it's own banner i.e. you could not say there was any subsidised development. So Mercedes stepped in at the 11th hour on the pushrod project. I wonder if anything would have been different and that engine was a Chevy?

I'm not sure. I think, and I may be 100% wrong, that it had more to do with personalities and ego than it did engine supply. The IRL was after all a series that was a littering of American driver in Italian cars with Oldsmobile and Nissan engines. I've never quite seen how different that is to CART with Mercedes, Ford and Honda engines mostly driving cars built in the UK (swift exempt).

You could argue it for ever! It was a huge shame that both series were damaged.

Getting back the the PC-23, if anyone is interested we are restoring one at the moment. A small film company has been following us and 3 parts of the story are on yourtube -

Part 1 -

Part 2 -

Part 3 -

It's a terrific car although ours has seen rather better days. Tony's photos and cutaway are being used in part as a reference, as mentioned about the original cutaway was with the 256D engine that we plan to install.

Getting back the the PC-23, if anyone is interested we are restoring one at the moment. A small film company has been following us and 3 parts of the story are on yourtube -

Part 1 -

Part 2 -

Part 3 -

It's a terrific car although ours has seen rather better days. Tony's photos and cutaway are being used in part as a reference, as mentioned about the original cutaway was with the 256D engine that we plan to install.

Hi Patrick,

Absolutely fascinating....will the rest of the videos be posted on the Dawn Treader Performance Channel when they are completed?

Absolutely fascinating....will the rest of the videos be posted on the Dawn Treader Performance Channel when they are completed?

Thanks so much!

John

That's the plan. It's been a bit slow going the last few weeks - you hit a point during restorations where not a lot seems to happen although in truth it is - the enthusiasm curve takes a few dips between the exciting parts of taking the car apart and putting it back together again. The tub is till being stripped and I've rather slowed it down by pushing another project through the paint shop first. The amount of paint on the car is just unreal - 3mm in parts. It pealed off in big chunks and I'm sure the tub alone will lose over 7kg.

We should get the uprights back shortly and begin to build them back up. Luckily we do now have the tooling to do that job - tooling is a huge deal in these things as it's all bespoke and is generally overlooked. The stub shaft nuts have to be done up extremely tight using a jig and torque multiplier. To get the bearing pre-load correct you have to do this several times on occasion. We have got some of the original guys working on the wishbones now which is terrific. It was not unexpected but quite a blow never the less to find the wishbones had been chromed.

So yes, more to come but we are in the slow part which lasts a good few months. It will be worth it in the end.

It's so damn interesting to actually see the myriad of steps involved in a first rate restoration process from start to finish and learn how the race car was constructed using a number of fascinating one off parts and procedures.....I await with eager anticipation!

Surely the brakes are restricted in other ways, too. Disc thickness, caliper materials and method of manufacture. I'm so used to seeing 13" wheels on F1 cars that it's not something I think about - it doesn't alter the fact that most of the cars built for the CART series during the time in question were great-looking vehicles, some even being, in my view, elegant. That is not a word I would use to describe any F1 car from the last couple of decades.

Tony Matthews-

I would heartily agree with your comment about the aesthetics of bodywork on modern F1 cars. While I understand that the bodywork looks like it does for reasons of aero performance and regulations, that does not make it any less difficult to look at. Of course, some of the detailing done to mechanical components is visually appealing to an engineer like myself.

Here's a story I heard involving the aesthetics of aerodynamic surfaces. About a decade ago, the US military had a fighter design competition between Boeing and Lockheed-Martin for what became the F-35. The X-32 aircraft submitted by Boeing was plug-ugly, while the X-35 submitted by Lockheed-Martin looked good. Legend has it that while the X-32 had a bit better performance than the X-35, the X-32 design was ultimately rejected because most of the test pilots complained about how ugly it was.

. The X-32 aircraft submitted by Boeing was plug-ugly, while the X-35 submitted by Lockheed-Martin looked good. Legend has it that while the X-32 had a bit better performance than the X-35, the X-32 design was ultimately rejected because most of the test pilots complained about how ugly it was.

The Boeing was nicknamed Monica by at least some of the design team, no cigars for guessing why.

We've also just got these back from heat treatment. The PC-23 uses these pins in place of bolts to attach the damper to the rocker - I assume for serviceability Nigel? Ours have seen much better days and one had lost an ear so we've had to resort to re-manufacturing them.